There were some problems with hosting. Theyn were corrected.
At the same time I have corrected the design and the diagram.
Then I returned to the previous address.
http://www.lind.by.ruIf somebody is interested in the project, I'll be glad to cooperate.

interesting concept, just two things though. a) how will you get more than the initial force of the "pulse" thing or whatever you call it because as they rebound or return to their original position then that will counteract what original thrust you got. b) even if you can solve problem a, such an engine would have to be built in space since there's no way you could get a full g of thrust from it and even in space those spheres would have to be massive and attached by very long tethers to get meaningful propulsion.

if i missed something and you have solved those 2 problems then i think it's a great idea, but i don't think you're gonna find anyone on here that'll be able/want to support you if you want to build it.

Fascinating theory. I wonder in the figure 1, (http://www.lind.by.ru/risunki/pic2.jpg), where does the forces Fc1 and Fc2 disappear, as they doesn't appear to be included in the resultant vector Fr at all.

Resulting vector Fr is the sum of vectors of forces -Fc1 and -Fc2. Forces Fc1 and Fc2 disappear at the moment of the termination of spheres movement in a vertical plane.

Rate of the initial mechanics. High school.

You just keep your rolling eyes to yourself.

Laws of movement according to Newton:

I
An object at rest remains at rest and an object in motion will continue in motion with constant velocity (that is, constant speed in a straight line) unless it experiences a net external force.

II
The acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on it and inversely proportional to it's mass

III
If two bodies interact, the force exerted on body 1 by body 2 is equal to and opposite the force exerted on body 2 by body 1.

In short, the only force capable of bringing the spheres halt in the outlined system is delivered by the ship itself to which the spheres are attached to. Making the spheres rotate around the intended axis of acceleration will not make any difference to the equation.

2 Vendigo
You are not absolutely right in the statements. As the given system cannot be considered only from the point of view the laws of the classical mechanics:

1. The given system is not closed - in it operating the centrifugal forces of inertia .

2. The system is not inertial, therefore to it is impossible apply laws of Newton in classical performance.

Force of counteraction (3 law of Newton) is compensated by centrifugal force which operates in a horizontal plane.

( http://www.lind.by.ru/risunki/pic2.gif ) Here is the Corrected figure which describes process occurbing in system more precisely.
And if to consider projections of all forces to an axis of rotation they compensate each other. There is only one force which change a pulse of system as a whole. (Blue F)

2 VendigoYou are not absolutely right in the statements. As the given system cannot be considered only from the point of view the laws of the classical mechanics:

1. The given system is not closed - in it operating the centrifugal forces of inertia .

2. The system is not inertial, therefore to it is impossible apply laws of Newton in classical performance.

Force of counteraction (3 law of Newton) is compensated by centrifugal force which operates in a horizontal plane.

( http://www.lind.by.ru/risunki/pic2.gif ) Here is the Corrected figure which describes process occurbing in system more precisely.And if to consider projections of all forces to an axis of rotation they compensate each other. There is only one force which change a pulse of system as a whole. (Blue F)

Deconstructing the GIF animation:

The T (tension?) vectors are superfluous. They are derivative of the Ft and (oddly placed) -Ft vectors. Furthermore, the said force vectors cancel each other out, giving no net force while in the transit motion. Rotating the system does not alter the linear forces in any way. (By the way, physicists do not use the term "centrifugal force" as it is a misnomer for central force. This force accounts for the centripetal acceleration that is required for the circular path).

Even though it seems as if the central force would seem to return the spheres into initial position with no net , it does not. Even though the rotational energies vary while the the radius change, it does not change the linear inertia in any way, since their actual mass remains unchanged. The energy

Furthermore, even though there is an impulse at the initial stage when the spheres are repelled by the magnetic force, the impulse is nulled when the spheres come into a halt at the end of their free travel.

And whether the system is inertial or not: Star Trek had inertial dampeners, real life does not. The system is inertial, whether it is intended or not.

Debating whether the newtonian laws apply in rotational systems is useless. By observations, they do. Even theory of relativity (which the newtonian model is an approximation of) will not change that. Applying unheard-of laws into the equation will not make it work.

I Absolutely agree with you. But.
1. In figure ALL forces working in system, except for gravitational are represented. Whether it is not dependent on that they render influence on behaviour whether or not.
Ft - vectors is result of the sum two vectors: - Fc+T instead of mg+T.
2. Laws of Newton are not absolute. For the certain systems you have correctly noticed - they may be used approximately.
3. How there may be a pulse equal to zero when the theory and practice speak about the opposite? How you then explain a stretching of a spring almost twice?

And the last.
If centrifugal force is capable to change energy of system how it is possible to speak, what it does not exist?

First, a correction to myself. . Rotational energies do NOT vary as I mistakenly stated. I meant rotational inertia.

Centrifugal force is a virtual force. The correct term is central force, which is not a semantic detail but a very different concept; central force is required to provide the centipetal acceleration for the circular motion. If the path is disrupted, the force will change accordingly; the central force cannot be made to work; instead, the momentum energy will do the fo For instance, a sling does not propel the rock with "centrifugal force"; the rock flies tangentially from the release point at the rim velocity. Remember, force is mass multiplyed by acceleration; in the moment of release, the rock is not accelerating nor decelerating; it follows a straight line as per newton's laws of motion. Prior to release, though, it has been accelerating, towards the center of the sling.

I don't remember if this is how they taught it in high school though, but this is how it is explained to physics scholars.

So in effect, the forces you are describing in the concept are not centrifugal forces, they are momentum (or inertial) energies that translates normally as per laws of motion and energy conservation.

To the Newton's laws being an approximation stands relevant to issues dealing with relativity. In most practical applications, newton's laws will suffice, with the exceptions of particle accelerators and satellite trajectories flying near considerable gravity wells.

Dealing with rotatind coordinates and static coordinates will not change the laws of physics, but it makes the calculations more complicated and makes hiding all of the unwanted forces into the folds.